Pope Benedict XVI told Catholics to have more babies "for the good of society," saying that some countries were being sapped of energy because of low birth rates.

"Having children is a gift that brings life and well-being to society," he told about 15,000 people at his weekly audience in the Vatican, to which he arrived by helicopter from his summer residence southeast of Rome.

He said the decline in the number of births "deprives some nations of freshness and energy and of hopes for the future incarnate in children."

The pope also spoke of "the security, the stability and the force of a numerous family."

Although the Vatican bans all forms of articial contraception, this is widely ignored even in predominantly Catholic countries such as Italy and Spain, which have some of the lowest birth rates in the world.

The pontiff regretted that God is "unhappily often excluded or ignored" in many societies.

"A sound society certainly is born out of the commitment of all of its members, but it also has a need of the blessing and support of God," he said.

Frankly, the Europeans will deserve it if/when they are over-run by Muslims, who have no problem spitting out kids and making the sacrifices necessarily to have at least moderately sized families (sorry to inform people, but three or four kids is not a "big family"). They've abandoned God, both practically and theoretically, and have few children. IOW, they have nothing going for them, in the face of a fertile, zealous people (like the Muslims.)

As a Canadian, this is something which gets under my skin here too. There are so many born, white Canadians who endlessly complain about the changing complexion of their country due to immigration. Yet the fact of the matter is, these same whites don't have children, and certainly not in the numbers needed to replace themselves, let alone populate our vastly under-populated, resource rich nation. So, if it takes bringing in east-Indians, Pakistanis, Chinese, etc. to keep the wheels turning, well t.s..

Frankly, the Europeans will deserve it if/when they are over-run by Muslims, who have no problem spitting out kids

Thats a fairly disgusting way of describing the miracle of childbirth. Do you think Muslims should use condoms or have abortions?

Logged

Violence is a lie, for it goes against the truth of our faith, the truth of our humanity. Violence destroys what it claims to defend: the dignity, the life, the freedom of human beings. Violence is a crime against humanity, for it destroys the very fabric of society.

That is a bit over the top there, Tom - are you not getting enough attention at home again?

Despite not agreeing with Papal positions calling the recent popes brainless is quite absurd. And interestingly enough before becoming a pope Karol Wojtyla wrote a very good book on this very topic, Love and Responsibility. And to be sure Cardinal Ratzinger was one the most important recent Catholic theologians - so calling them brainless is really only a reflection of your diminished intellectual capability. I do agree that the failure to differentiate a monastic vocation from the priesthood has been a source of problems for the Catholic Church, but it is a small problem compared to the bigger picture.

Thats a fairly disgusting way of describing the miracle of childbirth. Do you think Muslims should use condoms or have abortions?

I dont know about abortions, but condoms would probably be a good idea; the world is not yet overpopulated to the extent that we lack resources, but if 8+ kids in a family were to be the norm we would soon reach that point. Furthermore, an unfortunate reality is that the areas where population expansion is most devistating also have the highest birth rate; while Canada may be under populated (though I doubt it, they do have enough people to harvest the resources they want to, don't they?), countries like China and India are certainly overpopulated. Also, in many European countries, there is currently a problem with overpopulation (the Netherlands comes to mind), though it will probably be dealt with, in time, because of a low birth rate; provided immigration isn't too high.

Am I suggesting we go to the extremes of China? Of course not, but people hardly need to be encouraged to procreate, enough do quite well on their own, we're not yet in danger of extinction; a more helpful decree from the Vatican may be one lifting the ban on, and perhaps even encouraging, birth control.

The Holy Father has been the universal advocate of the family's fundamental rights at important world meetings, with heads of State, in Parliaments and in conversations with politicians. He has been a determined champion of the rights of all poor families and poor peoples subjected to the arbitrary policies of the powerful who, with no respect for their sovereignty, overwhelm them with pressures and undue demands that are incompatible with their culture and dignity. So it was that his authoritative words rang out in the face of the myth of overpopulation that serves as an excuse for birth control, disrespectful or inhumane, with policies that are the tools of the new ideologies which exploit the weakest.

He has rejected the Neo-Malthusian concept that excludes the most deprived from the banquet of life and gives priority to the domination and opulence of the powerful. He unflinchingly takes up the challenge of Paul VI's Address to the General Assembly of the United Nations (4 October 1965): "Your task is to ensure that the harvest of humanity yields food in abundance and does not presage artificial birth control, that would be logical, aiming at reducing the number of those invited to the banquet of life".

Incidentally Pope Benedicts remarks were part of an ongoing Catechesis on the Psalms at his weekly audience. On this occasion he was referring to Psalm 126 (127) which says3 Sons are indeed a heritage from the Lord, the fruit of the womb a reward. 4 Like arrows in the hand of a warrior are the sons of one's youth. 5 Happy is the man who has his quiver full of them. He shall not be put to shame when he speaks with his enemies in the gate.

Violence is a lie, for it goes against the truth of our faith, the truth of our humanity. Violence destroys what it claims to defend: the dignity, the life, the freedom of human beings. Violence is a crime against humanity, for it destroys the very fabric of society.

"Your task is to ensure that the harvest of humanity yields food in abundance and does not presage artificial birth control, that would be logical, aiming at reducing the number of those invited to the banquet of life"

So can I assume that the Latin church has now come out in support of Fornication and Adultery? As both of these would help increase 'the number of those invited to the banquet of life.'

I'm not going to comment on the over all intelligence of Paul VI, but I will say that his logic was flawed and that this particular statement was poorly thoughtout; I hope he fired that speech writer.

So can I assume that the Latin church has now come out in support of Fornication and Adultery? As both of these would help increase 'the number of those invited to the banquet of life.'

I'm not going to comment on the over all intelligence of Paul VI, but I will say that his logic was flawed and that this particular statement was poorly thoughtout; I hope he fired that speech writer.

Where did Pope Paul talk about "increase"?

Logged

Violence is a lie, for it goes against the truth of our faith, the truth of our humanity. Violence destroys what it claims to defend: the dignity, the life, the freedom of human beings. Violence is a crime against humanity, for it destroys the very fabric of society.

No actually. The path I'm choosing for my life is radically different than anything you could imagine. Hopefully you will stop deluding yourself with anti-ecclesiastical psuedo-scholars that you can't even defend before it's too late.

Oh, he doesn't want an increase? Then, in that case, he should have had no problem with Birth Control.

I asked not what he wanted but what he actually said. Since you mentioned his speechwriter this seems relevant. So where in his speech to Paul VI say "increase"? Or did you just misquote him because insulting Catholics is more important than fidelity to facts?

« Last Edit: September 04, 2005, 03:59:45 AM by Philokalia »

Logged

Violence is a lie, for it goes against the truth of our faith, the truth of our humanity. Violence destroys what it claims to defend: the dignity, the life, the freedom of human beings. Violence is a crime against humanity, for it destroys the very fabric of society.

I asked not what he wanted but what he actually said. Since you mentioned his speechwriter this seems relevant. So where in his speech to Paul VI say "increase"? Or did you just misquote him because insulting Catholics is more important than fidelity to facts?

Ok, let me try this again in a more ovbious manner, to satisfy the logic impaired among us (i.e. those who cannot grasp the concept of increase and reduce being antonyms):

'So can I assume that the Latin church has now come out in opposistion to moral codes against Fornication and Adultery? As these moral codes, like birth control, help to reduce "the number of those invited to the banquet of life."'

Now please tell me I dont have to explain the grammatical relationship between 'to reduce' and 'reducing.' LOL

And finally, while I have no doubt Paul VI opposed birth control, here I am generous in criticizing his speech writer for the simple reason that there are effective ways to defend a bad posistion and foolish ways to defend one, the example you gave was a example of a foolish way and dare I say unbecomming of the vatican, which I often admire for their skills at propaganda. If I were defending birth control before the UN, I would focus on ineffectiveness of birth control, using statistics tailored to my purpose, and argue that free access to birth control encourages behaviour that spreads disease and finally accuse the proponents of birth control availability in the third world of racism, imperialism, and even a type of genocide. Now THAT would be a propaganda speech worthy of the Vatican and it might actually have had some effect other than making the Pope look like a fool before the represenatives of the rulers of the world.

The Istanbul-based Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople and the Mt Athos monastic community have opted for stealth rather than force in their efforts to evict some 100 ultra-Orthodox monks from the Esphigmenou Monastery.

The abbots of the other 19 Mt Athos monasteries met yesterday at Karyes, the community’s administrative center, to decide on further action against the Esphigmenou monks whom they asked to leave the monastery in December 2002. The most likely course of action, it appeared last night, is to establish another monastic community, decare it the legal proprietors of the monastery and settle it temporarily elsewhere.

Last March, Greece’s Council of State, the highest administrative court, rejected an appeal by Esphigmenou’s abbot, Methodios, to nullify the eviction order by the Patriarchate and the monastic community. The court said it had no jurisdiction over the matter, adding that the Patriarchate has absolute authority over the community. The Esphigmenou monks broke with the mainstream Orthodox Church in 1964, when Patriarch Athenagoras met with Pope John VI. The ultra-Orthodox regard the pope as evil incarnate.

So you think John Paul the Great was brainless...I understand this is an Orthodox forum but it is also CHRISTIAN.Being an orthodox forum doesn't give anyone the right to insult and offense a personadmired and considered saint to 1.5 BILLION peope. Or maybe u think you're the only one out therewith a brain...?

Logged

Ten years have passed, the girl I lovedis now a woman, but I am still a child...-Sad-ending fairytale, Miltos Paschalidis

If I were defending birth control before the UN, I would focus on ineffectiveness of birth control, using statistics tailored to my purpose, and argue that free access to birth control encourages behaviour that spreads disease and finally accuse the proponents of birth control availability in the third world of racism, imperialism, and even a type of genocide. Now THAT would be a propaganda speech worthy of the Vatican and it might actually have had some effect other than making the Pope look like a fool before the represenatives of the rulers of the world.

You mean if you were arguing against it?

First of all, why should any religious leader go to the UN to argue about contraception when the UN is already firmly in the eugenics and "overpopulation" myth making business?

Secondly, the Catholic Church and the traditional Orthodox position do not oppose artificial birth control because of its ineffectiveness but for the simple fact that it is immoral.

Being an orthodox forum doesn't give anyone the right to insult and offense a personadmired and considered saint to 1.5 BILLION peope. Or maybe u think you're the only one out therewith a brain...?

1.5 billion Roman Catholics or 1.5 Billion Hindus. It makes no difference - they are both outside the True Church and are on the Highway to Hell.

But you are right, obviously he was not brainless. How else could he have continued to fool the masses like he did. Although you have to admit that you have to be kinda stupid to be a Roman Catholic and follow a mortal man as if he was a god. Roman Catholics are not really that much different than Hindus come to think of it.

Just because a majority of the Orthodox have been sucked into the whole "we are sister churches" lie, does not mean that all have been.

Wow! ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š

Does this mean that you are going to start quoting from the Rudder, leave the GOA and opt for one of the "Truly True REAL Orthodox" synods that is only in Eucharistic communion with itself because everyone else is a graceless ecumenist? ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š

Does this mean that you are going to start quoting from the Rudder, leave the GOA and opt for one of the "Truly True REAL Orthodox" synods that is only in Eucharistic communion with itself because everyone else is a graceless ecumenist? ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š

Revelation 13:8 “all who dwell on the earth will worship him (the beast = ECUMENISM), everyone whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slain.”

Open your eyes, brother! Follow not the Beast! Flee from the feel-good watered down "church" that they feed to you through a straw!

First of all, why should any religious leader go to the UN to argue about contraception when the UN is already firmly in the eugenics and "overpopulation" myth making business?

But the quote presented was from an address to the UN, so to answer your question, the Pope. If one has to defend a posistion before the UN, or in any public forum, emotionally charged, politically correct nonsense is a powerful propaganda tool.

Quote

Secondly, the Catholic Church and the traditional Orthodox position do not oppose artificial birth control because of its ineffectiveness but for the simple fact that it is immoral.

The reason the Catholic Church is opposed to artificial contraception is because they made the mistake of publically asserting that posistion when the said posistion was popular and now they are stuck with it...we don't have to make the same political mistake.

The reason the Catholic Church is opposed to artificial contraception is because they made the mistake of publically asserting that posistion when the said posistion was popular and now they are stuck with it...we don't have to make the same political mistake.

I highly doubt that it was a popular thing to ban contraception in the late 1960s. The Canadian Bishops even went so far as to issue "The Winnipeg Statement" which said: "In accord with the accepted principles of moral theology, if these persons have tried sincerely but without success to pursue a line of conduct in keeping with the given directives, they may be safely assured that, whoever honestly chooses that course which seems right to him, does so in good conscience." This directly conflicts with Paul VI's teaching that contraception is a grave evil.

I was under the impression that Rome had opposed birth control before then, perhaps my thinking was in error. But even in the 60's, amongst the majority of the population (though perhaps not the most vocal part of the population), birth control would probably have been frowned upon.

I was under the impression that Rome had opposed birth control before then, perhaps my thinking was in error. But even in the 60's, amongst the majority of the population (though perhaps not the most vocal part of the population), birth control would probably have been frowned upon.

I thought you were talking about the encyclicals of Paul VI, sorry; I've no idea if they did have any official opposition of birth control before then. Not too sure about whether it was accepted in the 1960s, but I would suspect that it would be in most Western nations. It was actually illegal in many places though in the early 1960s, like Canada, but I guess the Courts knocked that law down.

I think we are getting way off topic here. My intention in the initial thread was to find out why the Roman Catholics (apparently) are not having as many children as say the Muslims. Im sure there is concern that t he RCC may be out populated and out influenced in the near future in many Western European countries. What will get the RC's back in the bedroom?

I think we are getting way off topic here.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š My intention in the initial thread was to find out why the Roman Catholics (apparently) are not having as many children as say the Muslims.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Im sure there is concern that t he RCC may be out populated and out influenced in the near future in many Western European countries.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š What will get the RC's back in the bedroom?ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š

A high birth rate is characteristic of a primitive society, especially a primitive agricultural culture; in these contexts large families give additional benifit and security to the parents. However, in more advanced societies large families actually accomplish the opposite, more economic hardship, it's only rational that people take the most benificial path. Then there is the factor of age of marriage, while marrying at an earlier age will deprive one of many advantages in an advanced society, it will actually give advantage in a more primitive agricultural society; and all this is ignoring birth control, which has already been discussed.

In short, we have a lower birth rate than the Moslems because we are more technologically advanced, economically secure, and culturally civilized than they are. Now if we're worried about being disadvantaged because of the difference in birth rate, perhaps we're looking in the wrong place for a solution; perhaps our problem is not that we have a low birth rate, perhaps the problem is that we have a form of government that they can influence by nothing more than excessive breeding.

A high birth rate is characteristic of a primitive society, especially a primitive agricultural culture; in these contexts large families give additional benifit and security to the parents. However, in more advanced societies large families actually accomplish the opposite, more economic hardship, it's only rational that people take the most benificial path. Then there is the factor of age of marriage, while marrying at an earlier age will deprive one of many advantages in an advanced society, it will actually give advantage in a more primitive agricultural society; and all this is ignoring birth control, which has already been discussed.

In short, we have a lower birth rate than the Moslems because we are more technologically advanced, economically secure, and culturally civilized than they are. Now if we're worried about being disadvantaged because of the difference in birth rate, perhaps we're looking in the wrong place for a solution; perhaps our problem is not that we have a low birth rate, perhaps the problem is that we have a form of government that they can influence by nothing more than excessive breeding.

I have married into a very large family. My brother in law - 13 children, My sister in law 8 children, I have over 100 nieces and nephews mostly on my wifes side and we are living in this technological age. It can be done- I am witness to it. almost all the adult children have at least some college and some post graduate degrees. Large families can prosper if you have the determination to do it. We have as a society replaced children with worldly things. This is the quest of most families that is bigger homes, 2 or 3 cars, vacation home and we know that children would prevent us from doing all these wonderful things. What is important in this life?

I have married into a very large family. My brother in law - 13 children, My sister in law 8 children, I have over 100 nieces and nephews mostly on my wifes side and we are living in this technological age.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š It can be done- I am witness to it.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š almost all the adult children have at least some college and some post graduate degrees.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Large families can prosper if you have the determination to do it.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š We have as a society replaced children with worldly things. This is the quest of most families that is bigger homes, 2 or 3 cars, vacation home and we know that children would prevent us from doing all these wonderful things.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š What is important in this life?

I didn't say it can't be done, I said that it is neither necessary nor economically benificial, thus we tend not to have large families; in past eras we tended to have larger families because it was necessary and/or economically benificial. Now whether or not one should have a large family is a different question; unless they are financially well off, I probably would not advise it for everyone's sake, but ultimately it's a matter of personal preference (provided you can actually take care of your children), with neither choice being essentially better or worse, many people live a full and happy life with few children or none at all; furthermore, people trying to improve the standard of living for their spouse/family can hardly be condemned. Now if large families like the one of which you speak (13 children) were widespread, I may argue that they have negative sociological impacts, but the overwhelming majority of the people choose the economically logical path, thus making sociological factors negligible.

What I don't understand is that if Roman Catholics are adhereing to their churches teachings regarding contraception as they claim they are when they criticize what they call out liberal attitudes... then - Why would it be necessary for the Pope to instruct them to multiply? They and mother nature should already be doing it as they have done for centuries.

Orthodoc

Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.

What I don't understand is that if Roman Catholics are adhereing to their churches teachings regarding contraception as they claim they are when they criticize what they call out liberal attitudes... then - Why would it be necessary for the Pope to instruct them to multiply?ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š They and mother nature should already be doing it as they have done for centuries.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š

Indeed. Ergo, they are clearly not obeying the RC birth control teaching. And, it is an open secret that most Catholics reject the birth control teaching. The core idea in Humanae Vitae is that artifical birth control is inherently evil by playing God. Yet, most people find that articial birth control (that does not involve or cause abortion) is a miracle of modern science -- for all the obvious reasons. However, there is another idea in Humane Vitae which is well worth being stressed: birth control is no substitute for self-control. As for the original topic --how to get Catholics to have more kids-- I think they won't after having 2 - 4 kids, if they live in rich countries, for all the obvious reasons. But, if by love and compassion as well as by firmness, we could persuade the people (including the Catholics) who are having abortions to instead carry their babies to term, there could be a sizeable increase in the number of kids.

The Roman Catholic Church is not a cesspool. It is my mom. It is also my sisters and one of my brothers and so on. It's also many of my neighbors. Etc.

The pope is not the anti-christ. He is the bishop of Rome, and he was making a commentary on the psalms to help people in his church to remember that parenthood is a *good* thing.

Arjuna, don't pay too much attention to Tom. He seems to have a kind of irrational hatred of the Roman Catholic Church. I'm sure that I'm not alone in finding his behavior embarrassing. Rest assured, that you will meet very few raving anti-Catholic bigots like TomS in real-world Orthodoxy.

I think this was the best thing a Pope has ever said. catholics have to get over the guilt of sex within marriage. The next step now is for the Pope to follow the Good Book and allow clergy to be married. It is after all Biblical.

A deacon must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and his household well. 1 Timothy 3:12

Don't we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord's brothers and Cephas ? 1 Corinthians 9:5

The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth. For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, because it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer. 1 Tinmothy 4:1-5

An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient. Since an overseer [bishop] is entrusted with God's work, he must be blameless--not overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest gain. Titus 1:6-7

The Roman Catholic Church is not a cesspool.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š It is my mom.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š It is also my sisters and one of my brothers and so on.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š It's also many of my neighbors.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Etc.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š

Then I suggest you do all that you can to drag them out of that cesspool and hose them off!

Arjuna, don't pay too much attention to Tom.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š He seems to have a kind of irrational hatred of the Roman Catholic Church.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š I'm sure that I'm not alone in finding his behavior embarrassing.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Rest assured, that you will meet very few raving anti-Catholic bigots like TomS in real-world Orthodoxy.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š

IRRATIONAL!!! ?? Read some HISTORY! Check out the LAWSUITS! The RCC is Satan Incarnate!

Arjuna, don't pay too much attention to Tom.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š He seems to have a kind of irrational hatred of the Roman Catholic Church.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š I'm sure that I'm not alone in finding his behavior embarrassing.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Rest assured, that you will meet very few raving anti-Catholic bigots like TomS in real-world Orthodoxy.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š

With all due respect Jennifer, MANY Orthodox, like myself are not bigotted, but have deep rooted historical reason to have a dislike for the Vatican and modern Roman Catholicism.

OK, this thread is now WAY off topic.The description of this forum says:"Discuss in charity issues uniting and dividing the Orthodox Church and the Roman/Eastern Catholic churches. (*in Communion with Rome). "Telling people their church is "satan incarnate" and a "cesspool", and their primate is "the antichrist" ain't no way to "win friends and influence people".Could we all please play by the rules and tone it down a little?

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.